1912 Supreme(Mad) 406

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MARAS
Gopalakrishnamaraju By His
Versus
Venkatanarasa Raju And Ors.
Decided On : 19 August, 1912

Debts reasonably incurred for the marriage of a twice born Hindu male are binding on the joint family properties.

Headnote:

Marriage Obligation - Hindu Law - The court agrees with the judgment that marriage is obligatory on Hindus who do not desire to adopt the life of a perpetual Brahmachari or of a Sanyasi, and debts reasonably incurred for the marriage of a twice born Hindu male are binding on the joint family properties.

Fact of the Case:

The court agrees with the judgment of Krishnaswami Aiyar J. in Kameswsra Sastri v. Veeracharlu (1910) I.L.R. 34 M. 422 that marriage is obligatory on Hindus who do not desire to adopt the life of a perpetual Brahmachari or of a Sanyasi, and debts reasonably incurred for the marriage of a twice born Hindu male are binding on the joint family properties.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that marriage is obligatory on Hindus who do not desire to adopt the life of a perpetual Brahmachari or of a Sanyasi, and debts reasonably incurred for the marriage of a twice born Hindu male are binding on the joint family properties.

Issues: The issue was whether debts reasonably incurred for the marriage of a twice born Hindu male are binding on the joint family properties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principle that marriage is obligatory on Hindus who do not desire to adopt the life of a perpetual Brahmachari or of a Sanyasi, and debts reasonably incurred for the marriage of a twice born Hindu male are binding on the joint family properties.

Final Decision: The court held that debts reasonably incurred for the marriage of a twice born Hindu male are binding on the joint family properties.